The Java community has decided to eventually remove support for the
pack200 format, but it still is there in Java11. Right now this is only
a warning, it will only become a real problem once the classes actually
get removed. They do not offer any alternative implementation right now,
and may never do (unlike the JAXB case, which is available as an
external library now).

I am aware of an alternative based on the former Apache Harmony code in
https://github.com/pfirmstone/pack200 but am unsure about its state -
both technically and legally - I very vaguely recall the Pack200 spec
was encumbered with Oracle patents but may be totally wrong.

In Ivy's case the only save option right now was to remove support for
pack200 archives and break existing setups that consume such archives
which seems to be excessive just in order to get rid of a warning.

If yu ask me I'd recommend to live with the warning for now and wait for
an alternative to the class library's pack200 classes to become
available - which hopefully happens before the Java version removing
support gets released.

Re: Java 11 Compatibility Problem

I agree with Stefan, at the moment I recommend ignoring those warnings.
There isn't anything else we can do (other than removing support for
pack200, which isn't a good option).

-Jaikiran

On 10/10/18 9:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:

> Hi Krzysztof
>
> I'm not actively working on Ivy so take my response with a grain of
> salt.
>
> On 2018-10-09, Dragan, Krzysztof wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> scanning latest version of Apache Ivy(2.5.0-rc-1) using jdeprscan on
>> jdk11 I noticed two problems with this jar.
>> These two methods using internal jdk marked for removal and will be deleted:
>> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>> java/util/jar/Pack200$Unpacker (forRemoval=true)
>> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>> java/util/jar/Pack200 (forRemoval=true)
> For background see https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/336>
> The Java community has decided to eventually remove support for the
> pack200 format, but it still is there in Java11. Right now this is only
> a warning, it will only become a real problem once the classes actually
> get removed. They do not offer any alternative implementation right now,
> and may never do (unlike the JAXB case, which is available as an
> external library now).
>
> I am aware of an alternative based on the former Apache Harmony code in
> https://github.com/pfirmstone/pack200 but am unsure about its state -
> both technically and legally - I very vaguely recall the Pack200 spec
> was encumbered with Oracle patents but may be totally wrong.
>
> In Ivy's case the only save option right now was to remove support for
> pack200 archives and break existing setups that consume such archives
> which seems to be excessive just in order to get rid of a warning.
>
> If yu ask me I'd recommend to live with the warning for now and wait for
> an alternative to the class library's pack200 classes to become
> available - which hopefully happens before the Java version removing
> support gets released.
>
> Stefan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>

AW: Java 11 Compatibility Problem

If I understand Dragans point right, the warning comes when analyzing the code.
Not just running Ivy.
So the normal user won't see the warning. Maybe we should implement a warning?

Jan

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Jaikiran Pai [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2018 07:08
> An: [hidden email]> Betreff: Re: Java 11 Compatibility Problem
>
> I agree with Stefan, at the moment I recommend ignoring those warnings.
> There isn't anything else we can do (other than removing support for
> pack200, which isn't a good option).
>
> -Jaikiran
>
>
> On 10/10/18 9:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> > Hi Krzysztof
> >
> > I'm not actively working on Ivy so take my response with a grain of
> > salt.
> >
> > On 2018-10-09, Dragan, Krzysztof wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> scanning latest version of Apache Ivy(2.5.0-rc-1) using jdeprscan on
> >> jdk11 I noticed two problems with this jar.
> >> These two methods using internal jdk marked for removal and will be
> deleted:
> >> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
> >> java/util/jar/Pack200$Unpacker (forRemoval=true)
> >> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
> >> java/util/jar/Pack200 (forRemoval=true)
> > For background see https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/336> >
> > The Java community has decided to eventually remove support for the
> > pack200 format, but it still is there in Java11. Right now this is
> > only a warning, it will only become a real problem once the classes
> > actually get removed. They do not offer any alternative
> implementation
> > right now, and may never do (unlike the JAXB case, which is available
> > as an external library now).
> >
> > I am aware of an alternative based on the former Apache Harmony code
> > in https://github.com/pfirmstone/pack200 but am unsure about its
> state
> > - both technically and legally - I very vaguely recall the Pack200
> > spec was encumbered with Oracle patents but may be totally wrong.
> >
> > In Ivy's case the only save option right now was to remove support
> for
> > pack200 archives and break existing setups that consume such archives
> > which seems to be excessive just in order to get rid of a warning.
> >
> > If yu ask me I'd recommend to live with the warning for now and wait
> > for an alternative to the class library's pack200 classes to become
> > available - which hopefully happens before the Java version removing
> > support gets released.
> >
> > Stefan
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
> > commands, e-mail: [hidden email]> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Re: AW: Java 11 Compatibility Problem

Hi Jan,

For end users (of Ivy), the place where pack200 packaging becomes
visible is when they reference it in their dependencies as noted in our
doc[1]. So IMO, I think we should probably add a note/warning within our
documentation than a runtime log/warn message. But I still think, it's a
bit too early to do that. Maybe we should wait a few more releases of
Java and see if any alternatives show up?

> If I understand Dragans point right, the warning comes when analyzing the code.
> Not just running Ivy.
> So the normal user won't see the warning. Maybe we should implement a warning?
>
> Jan
>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Jaikiran Pai [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2018 07:08
>> An: [hidden email]>> Betreff: Re: Java 11 Compatibility Problem
>>
>> I agree with Stefan, at the moment I recommend ignoring those warnings.
>> There isn't anything else we can do (other than removing support for
>> pack200, which isn't a good option).
>>
>> -Jaikiran
>>
>>
>> On 10/10/18 9:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>> Hi Krzysztof
>>>
>>> I'm not actively working on Ivy so take my response with a grain of
>>> salt.
>>>
>>> On 2018-10-09, Dragan, Krzysztof wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>> scanning latest version of Apache Ivy(2.5.0-rc-1) using jdeprscan on
>>>> jdk11 I noticed two problems with this jar.
>>>> These two methods using internal jdk marked for removal and will be
>> deleted:
>>>> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>>>> java/util/jar/Pack200$Unpacker (forRemoval=true)
>>>> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>>>> java/util/jar/Pack200 (forRemoval=true)
>>> For background see https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/336>>>
>>> The Java community has decided to eventually remove support for the
>>> pack200 format, but it still is there in Java11. Right now this is
>>> only a warning, it will only become a real problem once the classes
>>> actually get removed. They do not offer any alternative
>> implementation
>>> right now, and may never do (unlike the JAXB case, which is available
>>> as an external library now).
>>>
>>> I am aware of an alternative based on the former Apache Harmony code
>>> in https://github.com/pfirmstone/pack200 but am unsure about its
>> state
>>> - both technically and legally - I very vaguely recall the Pack200
>>> spec was encumbered with Oracle patents but may be totally wrong.
>>>
>>> In Ivy's case the only save option right now was to remove support
>> for
>>> pack200 archives and break existing setups that consume such archives
>>> which seems to be excessive just in order to get rid of a warning.
>>>
>>> If yu ask me I'd recommend to live with the warning for now and wait
>>> for an alternative to the class library's pack200 classes to become
>>> available - which hopefully happens before the Java version removing
>>> support gets released.
>>>
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
>>> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
>> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>

> Le 10 oct. 2018 à 14:04, Jaikiran Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> Hi Jan,
>
> For end users (of Ivy), the place where pack200 packaging becomes
> visible is when they reference it in their dependencies as noted in our
> doc[1]. So IMO, I think we should probably add a note/warning within our
> documentation than a runtime log/warn message. But I still think, it's a
> bit too early to do that. Maybe we should wait a few more releases of
> Java and see if any alternatives show up?
>
> [1]
> https://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/concept.html#packaging>
> -Jaikiran
> On 10/10/18 11:09 AM, Jan Matèrne (jhm) wrote:
>> If I understand Dragans point right, the warning comes when analyzing the code.
>> Not just running Ivy.
>> So the normal user won't see the warning. Maybe we should implement a warning?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Jaikiran Pai [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 10. Oktober 2018 07:08
>>> An: [hidden email]>>> Betreff: Re: Java 11 Compatibility Problem
>>>
>>> I agree with Stefan, at the moment I recommend ignoring those warnings.
>>> There isn't anything else we can do (other than removing support for
>>> pack200, which isn't a good option).
>>>
>>> -Jaikiran
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10/10/18 9:56 AM, Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>>> Hi Krzysztof
>>>>
>>>> I'm not actively working on Ivy so take my response with a grain of
>>>> salt.
>>>>
>>>> On 2018-10-09, Dragan, Krzysztof wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> scanning latest version of Apache Ivy(2.5.0-rc-1) using jdeprscan on
>>>>> jdk11 I noticed two problems with this jar.
>>>>> These two methods using internal jdk marked for removal and will be
>>> deleted:
>>>>> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>>>>> java/util/jar/Pack200$Unpacker (forRemoval=true)
>>>>> * class org/apache/ivy/util/FileUtil uses deprecated class
>>>>> java/util/jar/Pack200 (forRemoval=true)
>>>> For background see https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/336>>>>
>>>> The Java community has decided to eventually remove support for the
>>>> pack200 format, but it still is there in Java11. Right now this is
>>>> only a warning, it will only become a real problem once the classes
>>>> actually get removed. They do not offer any alternative
>>> implementation
>>>> right now, and may never do (unlike the JAXB case, which is available
>>>> as an external library now).
>>>>
>>>> I am aware of an alternative based on the former Apache Harmony code
>>>> in https://github.com/pfirmstone/pack200 but am unsure about its
>>> state
>>>> - both technically and legally - I very vaguely recall the Pack200
>>>> spec was encumbered with Oracle patents but may be totally wrong.
>>>>
>>>> In Ivy's case the only save option right now was to remove support
>>> for
>>>> pack200 archives and break existing setups that consume such archives
>>>> which seems to be excessive just in order to get rid of a warning.
>>>>
>>>> If yu ask me I'd recommend to live with the warning for now and wait
>>>> for an alternative to the class library's pack200 classes to become
>>>> available - which hopefully happens before the Java version removing
>>>> support gets released.
>>>>
>>>> Stefan
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
>>>> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
>>> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]>